Chris Core's heart is in the wrong place, but he's closer to right than usual

Our good friend Chris Core is back commenting on cyclists who have the audacity to ride in same roads that car commuters do.

Mr. Core is an old hand at this, as he's been marching this well-trod path since at least 2002. Basically he doesn't think cyclists belong on roads where drivers are. He got the many reasonable responses to that letter (it's sad to think that the RCPT was in bad shape as long ago as 2002) which he ignored, because in 2008 he had a commentary on WTOP that basically reiterated his position that cyclists should get onto the perfectly good bike path. He received a lot of push back against that, came out with a follow-on commentary and had me and then-WABA executive director Eric Gilliland on his TV show.

Then in 2010, he used a bike-bike crash on the Capital Crescent Trail to argue that cyclists belong neither on trails (where they might crash into pedestrians) or roads (where they place themselves in danger) and thus should limit themselves to dedicated bike paths and tracks of which there were none at the time. I suppose by now, we could consider protected bike lanes as dedicated bike paths, but that doesn't help people get around much.

Now, he's at it again [Some real talk about bikes in the road]. In a recent commentary he still wrongly states that cyclists and drivers can't share the road and I still think he's more concerned with getting cyclists out of his way than he is with safety, but he somehow gets a lot right.

A new study says our area has the worst gridlock of any in the country. In Arlington a group called BikeArlington is coming up with what they call a "comfort map," meaning a map to show which of Arlington's streets are the safest for pedalers.

These two stories are related and here's how: Obviously, if we could get more motorists on two wheels it would help to reduce our traffic, but because our roads are so crowded, the truth is bikes and cars just can not safely use the same roads.* I see the sign "Share the Road" all around where I live and on some little used streets this is possible, but on major commuting streets there just isn't enough road to share.

And because bikes and cars move at different speeds and cars outweigh bikes by a lot, it's never going to be truly safe for bikers on major roads. If we want more people to bike to work, what we need is an extensive network of bike paths as some European cities have. Paths just for bikes. No runners. No cars. I think that would be a wise long-term investment.

Ignoring the "worst gridlock" claim that GGW debunked, again, and that he didn't bother to figure out who BikeArlington is (a part of the Arlington government) he's basically advocating for more protected bike lanes - and specifically on "major commuting streets". It's great to see that he's willing to support road diets and the removal of curbside parking in order to facilitate the kind of safe-street designs that will encourage more people to bike to work while leading to safer roads. Welcome aboard Mr. Core!

Perhaps Mr. Core has finally seen that the desire of cyclists for safe infrastructure and the desire of drivers for less congestion are truly aligned.

Methinks Mr. Core is not really thinking. This whole physics thing of not having two things in one place at one time would seem to mean less room for his car. But if he is serious, that is great.

I think he really means that until there are separate infrastructures, bikes need to get off the road. By then, Mr. Core and Mr. Milloy will have gone to the great freeway in the sky where the roads are like car commercials.

First, bicycles have always been allowed on the roads in the USA (with the exception of many high speed highways) and in every other Country on the world. The only place I've found bikes banned from the roads are large cities in India and China.

Second, Core once again completely ignores the major problem. Drivers are becoming less and less responsible for driving safely. Speed limits are now considered a minimum instead of the maximum, right turns at stop lights and stop signs are now yield signs. Drivers are now as much if not more scofflaws than cyclist are.

The fact is, even removing the number of cyclists and peds killed by drivers, the number of drivers killing other drivers because drivers drive dangerously is very high.

Sadly, while Chris has stated that cyclists need to following rules, it seems that drivers not following the rules and killing other drivers seems is a Core value.

My interpretation is that he found himself inconvenienced by being stuck behind a cyclist in 2002, again in 2010, and then again this year. Or three times in 13 years, which seems about right based on my experience. The difference being that he needs to fill a radio show.

After reading this article, I got a mental picture of Chris Core, Courtland Milloy and Tony Kornheiser climbing into a MAD MAX type car armed with flame throwers and 50 caliber machine guns and then spending the day by chasing down cyclists that “don’t belong on MY road”.

I don't think Chris Core is totally wrong about major commuting streets. I live in Alexandria and don't feel safe riding up Washington Street in Old Town or Route 1 anytime much less rush hour. Take Washington Street as an example. I see cyclists all the time riding with rush hour traffic in the far right lane. That lane is HOV so naturally motorists try to pass. I avoid it by riding one block over which is much quieter and safer, and gets me to the same place. I don't want to put myself in position of relying on a motorist to "share the road" during rush hour when I know those knuckleheads are in a hurry and constantly doing stupid shit. I agree 100% that we need safer bicycling options on major commuter streets. Until then, I'm gonna take the safe route even though it's legal for me to be on the commuter road. If there's one thing I've learned it's that rush hour motorists are predictably fucking insane.